https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203329 A taxing exemption notification was construed according to its plain language, and clause (3) required periods of nil sugar production in any of the three base years to be ignored when computing average production. The Court held that earlier decisions on different notifications could not control this wording, and it refused to supply any omission or apply reading down where the provision was clear. The exemption was therefore to be calculated only on periods when sugar was actually produced, and nil-production years were not to be included in the averaging formula. en-us Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 May 2011 13:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203329 A taxing exemption notification was construed according to its plain language, and clause (3) required periods of nil sugar production in any of the three base years to be ignored when computing average production. The Court held that earlier decisions on different notifications could not control this wording, and it refused to supply any omission or apply reading down where the provision was clear. The exemption was therefore to be calculated only on periods when sugar was actually produced, and nil-production years were not to be included in the averaging formula. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203329